Terminology aside, whether you call it “frame” or “outer shape” or anything else, it is the part of the noun’s shape to the left of the line. The “cell” or “inner shape” or whatever you want to call the part of the noun’s shape to the right of the line.
What’s the line? The verb’s rank, of course: http://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Essays/A_Fine_Line <http://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Essays/A_Fine_Line> -Dan > On Jan 18, 2016, at 11:52 AM, Roger Hui <[email protected]> wrote: > > The terminology originated in SHARP APL in the 1980s. "Frame" was at times > called "outer shape". In some situations, "outer shape" may be a better, > more easily understood term. You know, cell shape and outer shape; outer > shape is part of the shape; etc. > > > > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 7:19 AM, Jose Mario Quintana < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> I would not be the one arguing for empty frame vs zero frame terminology :) >> (thanks for providing the context). >> >> Regarding frame, I meant it in the sense that Ken Chakahwata did: "to have >> a J definition of that fictitious primitive." >> >> Your executable model can, of course, readily address Ken's question and >> other similar questions for specific instances (pointing out, albeit rather >> tacitly, that such J definition already existed, was my main reason for >> mentioning your article): >> >> rk =. #@$ >> er =. (0:>.(+rk))`(<.rk) @. (0:<:[) >> fr =. -@er }. $@] >> cs =. -@er {. $@] >> >> (Y=. i.2 3 4) >> 0 1 2 3 >> 4 5 6 7 >> 8 9 10 11 >> >> 12 13 14 15 >> 16 17 18 19 >> 20 21 22 23 >> >> 3 (er;fr;cs) Y NB. effective rank; frame; cell shape >> ┌─┬┬─────┐ >> │3││2 3 4│ >> └─┴┴─────┘ >> >> 2 (er;fr;cs) Y NB. effective rank; frame; cell shape >> ┌─┬─┬───┐ >> │2│2│3 4│ >> └─┴─┴───┘ >> _1 (er;fr;cs) Y NB. effective rank; frame; cell shape >> ┌─┬─┬───┐ >> │2│2│3 4│ >> └─┴─┴───┘ >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 11:33 PM, Roger Hui <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> I did not define them; Roland Pesch did: Empty Frames in SHARP APL >>> <http://www.jsoftware.com/papers/EmptyFrames.htm>, 1986. I did rename >>> them >>> to "zero frames". Read the 1986 paper and you can decide for yourself >>> whether "empty frame" or "zero frame" is the better name. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Jose Mario Quintana < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> The verb (frame) as well as the Zero Frame concept are defined in [0] >> by >>>> Roger. >>>> >>>> [0] Rank and Uniformity >>>> http://www.jsoftware.com/papers/rank.htm >>>> >>>> On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 7:11 PM, Ken Chakahwata < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> My guess is that it would help if we could imagine that we had a >>>> primitive >>>>> called 'frame' in the same way as we have one called 'shape' i.e. $ >>>>> Then one way to get to the precise meaning of frame is to have a J >>>>> definition of that ficticious primitive. At a guess, this primitive >>>>> requires the 'rank' of the cells in order to then return the >>> appropriate >>>>> frame. >>>>> If we have an array of shape (x,y,z), and we stipulate cells of rank >> 3, >>>>> then the frame is presumably empty? Not sure of this... but anyhow, >>> just >>>> a >>>>> thought... >>>>> >>>>> Enjoy >>>>> ken >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Programming [mailto:[email protected]] >> On >>>>> Behalf Of Henry Rich >>>>> Sent: 17 January 2016 23:59 >>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Definition: Frame of an argument >>>>> >>>>> The terminology I use is an (x by y by z) array of cells, or an array >>> of >>>>> cells with frame (x,y,z), emphasizing that the frame is a (part of >> the) >>>>> shape rather than an array. >>>>> >>>>> Henry Rich >>>>> >>>>> On 1/17/2016 6:16 PM, Raul Miller wrote: >>>>>> Hmm... ok, reviewing >>>>>> http://www.jsoftware.com/help/primer/frame_and_cell.htm 'frame' >> does >>>>>> get used that way. >>>>>> >>>>>> I was thinking of the frame as having a shape rather than being the >>>>> shape. >>>>>> >>>>>> Then again, since you can think of an array as being (for example) >> an >>>>>> (x,y,z) frame of cells, I do not think that my interpretation was >>>>>> entirely incorrect, either. So I suppose I have gotten myself into >> a >>>>>> "much ado about nothing" sort of issue. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> For information about J forums see >> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >>>>> >>>>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> For information about J forums see >> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >>>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
